Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Storage feasibility is revenue-stack analysis: the capacity contract, tolling agreement, or merchant arbitrage and ancillary-service revenues the project depends on, augmentation and degradation economics across the contract life, interconnection position, and the market-rule exposure that merchant storage carries. Paired solar-plus-storage projects are modeled with the storage economics separated from the generation case.
Methodology uses ISO market data and price-spread analysis, contract review, degradation and augmentation cost modeling, and installed-cost benchmarks. Contracted revenue carries the coverage test; merchant stack revenue is presented as sensitivity.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. Clean-energy engagements are prepared to USDA 7 CFR Part 5001 where REAP and B&I apply — including the energy-production documentation, incentive analysis, and payback arithmetic REAP requires — and to conventional and institutional standards otherwise, with interconnection and incentive risk addressed directly rather than assumed away.
Representative clean-energy work includes a $52,688,000 green carbon project evaluation and renewable-energy feasibility within the firm's USDA REAP and B&I practice. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
A battery energy storage feasibility study is not a generic project analysis with the word “storage” inserted. The scope is built around the specific revenue architecture of the project: whether revenue flows from a capacity contract, a tolling agreement, merchant arbitrage, ancillary-service stacking, or some combination. Each source is treated differently because each carries different certainty, different duration, and different exposure to market-rule change.
The study documents the following for every engagement in this asset class:
Demand for battery storage capacity is not measured by counting customers in a trade area. It is measured by examining the grid conditions, market rules, and contractual relationships that create a monetizable need for the project’s output. The analysis is built from the ground up using sources that are specific to this asset class.
ISO and RTO public filings — including market-monitoring reports, price-spread data, and ancillary-service auction results — establish the historical revenue environment the project is entering. Utility integrated resource plans and state public-utility commission dockets document the procurement targets and capacity needs that drive contracted-revenue opportunities. The interconnection queue for the relevant ISO or utility is reviewed to identify both the project’s own position and the volume of competing storage capacity that has applied for or received interconnection agreements in the same zone.
Where a capacity contract or tolling agreement is already executed, the counterparty’s creditworthiness and the contract’s term, dispatch rights, and termination provisions are reviewed directly. Where revenue is partially or fully merchant, the analysis draws on published price-spread history and forward-curve data available from ISO settlement reports and energy-market data services, presented as a range rather than a point estimate. State energy-storage mandates, renewable-portfolio-standard compliance markets, and demand-response program rules are reviewed as secondary demand drivers. No revenue source is assumed; each is traced to a documented market mechanism.
A small number of inputs drive the coverage ratio for a battery storage project. Identifying them, documenting the basis for each, and stress-testing each independently is the analytical work that separates a credible study from a promotional pro forma. The following assumptions receive the most scrutiny because they move the numbers the most:
Credit officers and agency reviewers approach battery storage differently from conventional commercial real estate or equipment lending because the collateral’s value is inseparable from the revenue contracts and market rules that make it productive. A study prepared for this asset class must address those concerns directly.
For SBA engagements prepared to SOP 50 10 8, the study must demonstrate 1.15x operating debt-service coverage and 1.00x global coverage. Because storage revenue can be partly merchant, the SBA-compliant analysis must show that coverage holds at the contracted-revenue floor, not only at the blended base case. Merchant upside is presented separately and clearly labeled.
USDA REAP engagements require energy-production documentation, a payback calculation, and incentive analysis in the form the program prescribes. Battery storage projects that are paired with generation qualify under REAP’s renewable-energy-system definition, but the storage economics must be documented independently of the generation case. Business & Industry engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 and require the same revenue-certainty discipline as any B&I credit.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and focus heavily on the offtake contract’s term relative to the loan amortization, the creditworthiness of the capacity buyer or tolling counterparty, and whether augmentation and replacement reserves are funded. Independent confirmation that the degradation model is conservative — not optimistic — is a recurring request. Wert-Berater’s fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the reviewing agency; no fee is contingent on the finding, and no determination is revised under pressure.
Every engagement begins with a fixed, quoted fee returned within one business day of inquiry. The fee does not change based on the finding, and no portion is contingent on loan approval or project outcome. That structure is the foundation of independence: a firm whose fee depends on a favorable conclusion cannot credibly deliver an unfavorable one.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. For battery storage projects, a complete data room includes the interconnection agreement or study, the executed or draft offtake or tolling contract, the manufacturer’s performance warranty and degradation schedule, the most recent ISO queue confirmation, any existing engineering reports, and the project’s capital cost breakdown. Rush delivery is available when a closing timeline requires it.
Every engagement is published to a secure client portal. The financial model is a fully linked Excel workbook with no hardcoded values; it stays live in the portal and recalculates when inputs change. A lender or agency reviewer who wants to run a stress scenario can do so without requesting a revised report. Standard deliverables include the bound narrative report, the ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at plus/minus 5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from plus 0.5 to plus 3.0 percent, ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data, and an explicit statement of conditions. Wert-Berater has completed 4,000+ engagements representing more than $41.2 billion in evaluated project value; battery storage engagements follow the same discipline and the same delivery standard.
Wert-Berater quotes a fixed fee within one business day of inquiry. The fee is not contingent on the finding or on loan approval, and it does not change based on project size alone. Because scope varies — a simple contracted-revenue project differs from a merchant stack with paired solar — the quote reflects the actual work required. Contact the firm with a project summary to receive a specific number.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. For battery storage projects, completeness means the interconnection agreement or study, the offtake or tolling contract, the manufacturer’s degradation warranty, and the capital cost breakdown are all in hand. Rush delivery is available when a closing deadline requires it. Incomplete data rooms are the most common cause of delay.
The core difficulty is revenue certainty. A solar project with a power-purchase agreement has a single, legible revenue stream. A storage project may stack capacity payments, energy arbitrage, frequency regulation, and demand-charge reduction — each governed by different market rules, each subject to repricing by FERC order or ISO tariff change. Degradation and augmentation costs add a capital-event dimension that most pro formas understate. An independent study has to untangle each layer and test it separately.
Yes. SBA engagements must demonstrate 1.15x operating debt-service coverage. Because merchant revenue — arbitrage spreads, ancillary-service payments — is not guaranteed, a compliant study shows that coverage holds at the contracted-revenue floor. Merchant upside is modeled and presented as sensitivity, clearly labeled as such, so the credit officer can see exactly how much of the coverage depends on market outcomes rather than contract terms.
Yes, provided the study is built to address both standards from the start. REAP requires specific energy-production documentation, a payback calculation, and incentive analysis in the program’s prescribed form. A conventional lender typically requires 1.20x coverage and focuses on offtake-contract term and augmentation reserves. Wert-Berater structures engagements to satisfy both sets of requirements in a single report when dual-program financing is the plan.
A complete data room for this asset class includes the interconnection agreement or most recent interconnection study, the executed or draft offtake or tolling contract, the battery manufacturer’s performance warranty and capacity-degradation schedule, confirmation of the project’s ISO or utility queue position, any third-party engineering reports, and a detailed capital cost breakdown. Projects with only a preliminary interconnection estimate — not a completed study — carry cost and timeline risk that the feasibility study will document as a condition.
Financing resource. Read about the new SBA energy financing guarantee for qualifying businesses. Battery storage or other energy adjacency does not itself confer eligibility; SBA program rules and participating-lender underwriting still apply.
Storage economics change materially when the counterparty is a continuous industrial load rather than a wholesale market. See our data center market study methodology for how that load profile is established.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.